UK Offence Report

Contravention of The Fresh Meat and Poultry Meat (Hygiene, Inspection and Examinations for Residues)…

the instrument as a whole of The Fresh Meat and Poultry Meat (Hygiene, Inspection and Examinations for Residues) (Charges) Regulations 1990

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

Contravening this instrument is an offence under sections 10(2), 33 and 35 of the Food Safety Act 1990. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a person
Conduct
importing or exporting without authority
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Not determined

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a person meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.

Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.

Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.

What would breach the instrument as a whole?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. Moving the goods across the border under the Fresh Meat and Poultry Meat (Hygiene, Inspection and Examinations for Residues) (Charges) Regulations 1990 without the licence the instrument requires.
  2. Holding a licence for one consignment and using it for another.
  3. Sending goods in transit through the United Kingdom, where the provision catches transit as well as import and export.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to sections 10(2), 33 and 35 of the Food Safety Act 1990.

the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
10 December 1990
In force from
1 January 1991
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations implement in part the provisions of Council Decision 88/408/EEC(OJ No.L194, 22.7.88, p.24) on the level of the fees to be charged for health inspections and controls of fresh meat pursuant to Council Directive 85/73/EEC (OJ No.L32, 5.2.85, p.14). The Regulations require food authorities to make a charge for every health inspection and control exercise carried out by them. Where such an exercise is carried out at a slaughterhouse, the amount of the charge is to be equal to the Community standard charge prescribed in the Regulations less the charge which the Regulations also require the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to make in relation to examinations for the presence of residues except that— 1 where the total of the real cost of carrying out the exercise at a slaughterhouse and the charge for examinations for the presence of residues there is lower than the Community standard charge than— a where the total is higher than the minimum charge specified in the Regulations, the charge is to be an amount equal to that real cost; and b where that total cost is no higher than such minimum charge, the charge is to be an amount equal to that minimum charge less the charge for examinations for the presence of residues; and 2 where the total of such real cost and the charge for examinations for the presence of residues is higher than the Community standard charge the charge is to be— a an amount not exceeding that real cost; or b an amount equal to the Community standard charge less the charge for examinations for the presence of residues (regulation 4 and Schedule 1). Where such an exercise is carried out at any cutting premises the charge is to be calculated in the same manner as if it was carried out at a slaughterhouse (but without reference to charges for examinations for the presence of residues) and, in certain circumstances, a local authority can reduce the Community standard charge by up to 50 per cent (regulation 5 and Schedule 1). Where such an exercise is carried out at a cold store the charge is to be an amount equal to the real cost of the exercise (regulation 6). In calculating the real cost of carrying out a health inspection and control exercise at a slaughterhouse a food authority is required to assume that the real cost of its administration expenses falls to be assessed at a rate of 0.725 European Currency Units per tonne of unboned meat or unboned poultry meat and in calculating such cost at any cutting premises or cold store a local authority is required to use the factors specified in Schedule 2 (regulation 8). Before making a charge for a health inspection and control exercise under the Regulations a food authority is required to notify the occupier of the premises affected by such charge of the amount which it proposes to charge and to consider any representations made to it concerning the charge by any person whom it has notified (regulation 10). If the occupier considers that the authority has determined an amount in respect of the real cost of the exercise which is excessively high he may appeal to the appropriate Minister against it and if the appropriate Minister is satisfied that this is the case he shall require the authority to recalculate the amount of the charge in accordance with such directions as he may give it (regulation 12). The Regulations also require the Minister to make a charge at every slaughterhouse at which a health inspection and control exercise is carried out in respect of his functions related to examinations for the presence of residues and the food authority to recover that charge on his behalf (regulation 3(2), 7 and 9).

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.59.

Basis
the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
Confidence
0.59 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source